IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v62y2013icp176-184.html

Knowledge, risk, and policy support: Public perceptions of nuclear power

Author

Listed:
  • Stoutenborough, James W.
  • Sturgess, Shelbi G.
  • Vedlitz, Arnold

Abstract

Nuclear energy was becoming increasingly popular as an alternative to air polluting fossil fuel technologies through the latter half of the 2000s. The tragic events of March 11, 2011 in Fukushima, Japan appear to have instantly killed any momentum the nuclear industry had gained. While unfortunate, many argue that nuclear power is still a safe alternative and that the Fukushima disaster resulted from insufficient safety regulations in Japan, a problem that does not exist in the United States. This project examines U.S. public support for nuclear energy one year after the Fukushima tragedy, seeking to understand the influence of knowledge and risk perceptions on policy support. We evaluate public support for nuclear energy policy from several perspectives using risk and attitudinal measurements that are more specific than often found in the literature to obtain a greater understanding of the connection between policy and risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Stoutenborough, James W. & Sturgess, Shelbi G. & Vedlitz, Arnold, 2013. "Knowledge, risk, and policy support: Public perceptions of nuclear power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 176-184.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:62:y:2013:i:c:p:176-184
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.098
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513006058
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.098?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lupia,Arthur & McCubbins,Mathew D., 1998. "The Democratic Dilemma," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521585934, November.
    2. Timothy Besley & Robin Burgess, 2002. "The Political Economy of Government Responsiveness: Theory and Evidence from India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(4), pages 1415-1451.
    3. Li, Hui & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L. & Berrens, Robert P. & Herron, Kerry G., 2009. "Public support for reducing US reliance on fossil fuels: Investigating household willingness-to-pay for energy research and development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 731-742, January.
    4. Sears, David O. & Lau, Richard R. & Tyler, Tom R. & Allen, Harris M., 1980. "Self-Interest vs. Symbolic Politics in Policy Attitudes and Presidential Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(3), pages 670-684, September.
    5. Bonnie G. Colby, 2000. "Cap-and-Trade Policy Challenges: A Tale of Three Markets," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(4), pages 638-658.
    6. Andrew Keeler, 2007. "State greenhouse gas reduction policies: a move in the right direction?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 40(4), pages 353-365, December.
    7. Richard Williams, 2006. "Generalized ordered logit/partial proportional odds models for ordinal dependent variables," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 6(1), pages 58-82, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matt Guardino & Suzanne Mettler, 2020. "Revealing the “Hidden welfare state†: How policy information influences public attitudes about tax expenditures," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    2. Valentino Larcinese, 2009. "Information Acquisition, Ideology and Turnout: Theory and Evidence From Britain," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 237-276, April.
    3. James W. Stoutenborough & Arnold Vedlitz & Xinsheng Liu, 2015. "The Influence of Specific Risk Perceptions on Public Policy Support," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 658(1), pages 102-120, March.
    4. Healy, Andrew & Malhotra, Neil, 2009. "Myopic Voters and Natural Disaster Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(3), pages 387-406, August.
    5. Mengyuan Zhou, 2022. "Does the Source of Inheritance Matter in Bequest Attitudes? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 867-887, December.
    6. Anders Gustafsson, 2019. "Busy doing nothing: why politicians implement inefficient policies," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 282-299, September.
    7. Yuri Reina-Aranza, 2015. "Violencia de pareja y estado de salud de la mujer en Colombia," Documentos de Trabajo Sobre Economía Regional y Urbana 13964, Banco de la República, Economía Regional.
    8. Jason Barabas, 1998. "Wage Erosion, Economic Assessments, and Social Welfare Opinions," JCPR Working Papers 56, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    9. Karla Hoff & Arijit Sen, 2005. "Homeownership, Community Interactions, and Segregation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1167-1189, September.
    10. Qin, Wei & Liang, Quanxi & Jiao, Yan & Lu, Meiting & Shan, Yaowen, 2022. "Social trust and dividend payouts: Evidence from China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    11. Cristina Chaminade & Monica Plechero, 2015. "Do Regions Make a Difference? Regional Innovation Systems and Global Innovation Networks in the ICT Industry," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 215-237, February.
    12. David Altman, 2002. "Prospects for E-Government in Latin America: Satisfaction With Democracy, Social Accountability, and Direct Democracy," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 5-20, December.
    13. Giuseppina Guagnano & Elisabetta Santarelli & Isabella Santini, 2016. "Can Social Capital Affect Subjective Poverty in Europe? An Empirical Analysis Based on a Generalized Ordered Logit Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 128(2), pages 881-907, September.
    14. Hanna Dudek & Joanna Landmesser, 2012. "Income satisfaction and relative deprivation," Statistics in Transition new series, Główny Urząd Statystyczny (Polska), vol. 13(2), pages 321-334, June.
    15. Yahui Wang, 2019. "What Affects Participation in the Farmland Rental Market in Rural China? Evidence from CHARLS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-15, December.
    16. Astghik Mavisakalyan, 2013. "Development Priorities in an Emerging Decentralized Economy: The Case of Armenia’s Local Development Programs," Transition Studies Review, Springer;Central Eastern European University Network (CEEUN), vol. 20(1), pages 105-118, April.
    17. Thushyanthan Baskaran & Sonia Bhalotra & Brian Min & Yogesh Uppal, 2024. "Women legislators and economic performance," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 151-214, June.
    18. Marco Manacorda & Andrea Tesei, 2020. "Liberation Technology: Mobile Phones and Political Mobilization in Africa," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 533-567, March.
    19. Vizard, Polly, 2005. "The contributions of Professor Amartya Sen in the field of human rights," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6273, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Milena Djourelova & Ruben Durante & Gregory J. Martin, 2021. "The Impact of Online Competition on Local Newspapers: Evidence from the Introduction of Craigslist," CESifo Working Paper Series 9090, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:62:y:2013:i:c:p:176-184. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.